down and
start replicating again.
Can we use any other prevention for automating the failover.
Thanks
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 12:41 AM, Rick James wrote:
> Don't use circular replication with more than 2 servers. If one of your 3
> crashes and cannot be recovered, you will have a nigh
Don't use circular replication with more than 2 servers. If one of your 3
crashes and cannot be recovered, you will have a nightmare on your hands to fix
the broken replication.
> -Original Message-
> From: Stillman, Benjamin [mailto:bstill...@limitedbrands.com]
>
I stand corrected and apologize. Numerous multi-master setup descriptions I've
read have said to set this (including the one linked in the original question).
However, as you said, the entry in the manual clearly says it defaults to 0.
Learn something new every day. Thanks Shawn.
On Sep 24, 2
Hello Benjamin,
On 9/24/2012 10:52 AM, Stillman, Benjamin wrote:
replicate-same-server-id = 0 keeps MySQL from replicating binary log entries
from itself. For instance, here's a rough overview:
You write to Server A.
Server A writes that to its binary log.
Server B reads Server A's binary log
log
entries with its own server ID.
From: Adarsh Sharma [mailto:eddy.ada...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:39 AM
To: Stillman, Benjamin
Subject: Re: Doubt Regd. Circular Replication In Mysql
Yes I fixed , but i solve the issue by enabling log-slave-updates only
Why we use the be
om: Adarsh Sharma [mailto:eddy.ada...@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:23 AM
To: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Doubt Regd. Circular Replication In Mysql
Hi all,
Today i set up a circular replication between three nodes A,B & C successfully.
I expect whatever writes on A will p
Hi all,
Today i set up a circular replication between three nodes A,B & C
successfully.
I expect whatever writes on A will propagated to B & then Propagated to C
because the structure is like below :-
A -> B - > C -> A
I created a sample table stag in test database in A and i
- Original Message -
> From: "Jason J. W. Williams"
>
> I've got an issue where two MySQL servers are in circular/multimaster
> replication. One is server_id 6871 and the other 206871. The issue is
> that GRANT statements issued on 6871 are replicated to 206871 and
> then
> back to 6871 w
I was reading the circular replication post on Onlamp.com, how they
achieve this master-master configuration. I was wondering if this will
always work out in a scenario. For example:
auto_increment_increment = 10
auto_increment_offset = 1 (for NodeA), and 2 for (NodeB)
Node1 starts at time A, 5
Hello,
EDS and MySQL are having a webinar on the subject of circular replication
today. Check out:
http://www.mysql.com/news-and-events/web-seminars/index.html
If you can't make it today, it will be archived in the "On-Demand" section.
-- Jimmy
Alex Arul Lurthu wrote:
Chain
Chain replication is fine as long as reading stale data from the last slave
in your chain is ok. the staleness depends on the write throughput and
capacity of the intermediate slaves. But Chain replication with circular
replication is a definite no no in prod since if any intermediate fails, you
Hi All,
Is circular replication or chain replication is suitable for production
environment. Whether any testing has been done. If yes then, Please let me
know. There is any other issue related to circular replication.
Thanks
--
Krishna Chandra Prajapati
MySQL DBA,
Ed Ventures e-Learning
ns).
Regards, Jigal.
Any time you are running circular replication, it is possible for a
situation to arise where two servers receive "conflicting" updates at
nearly the same time; this can cause replication to stop on both servers
at the point where they read the other server
Stefan Kuhn wrote:
Am Thursday 27 October 2005 12:56 schrieb Raphaël 'SurcouF' Bordet:
Le vendredi 16 septembre 2005 à 18:14 +0200, Stefan Kuhn a écrit :
I'm using it with four machines (geographically separate) and it works
fine. Stefan
And can writes on each server in simultaneous time ?
Am Thursday 27 October 2005 12:56 schrieb Raphaël 'SurcouF' Bordet:
> Le vendredi 16 septembre 2005 à 18:14 +0200, Stefan Kuhn a écrit :
> > I'm using it with four machines (geographically separate) and it works
> > fine. Stefan
>
> And can writes on each server in simultaneous time ?
I don't under
Le vendredi 16 septembre 2005 à 18:14 +0200, Stefan Kuhn a écrit :
> I'm using it with four machines (geographically separate) and it works fine.
> Stefan
And can writes on each server in simultaneous time ?
--
Raphaël 'SurcouF' Bordet
http://debianfr.net/ | surcouf at debianfr dot net
--
My
> I'll be setting up a second master to do this same
> thing once per day to act as my daily backup.
Oops...I meant to say "second slave".
-Hank
--
MySQL General Mailing List
For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql
To unsubscribe:http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The long story short is we use the fact that MySQL has the ability to
> run the SQL thread and the IO thread of replication separately, and
> control them individually.
I'm fairly green with replication, but I have a simple cron job that
starts a PHP program that issues a "slave start", watches
On Sep 21, 2005, at 5:23 AM, Jeff wrote:
I am interested in how you go about doing a "delayed replication" to
protect against operator error. We've already fallen victim to that
situation here.
The long story short is we use the fact that MySQL has the ability to
run the SQL thread and the
> -Original Message-
> From: Bruce Dembecki [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 23:05
> To: Jeff
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> On Sep 16, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Jeff wrote:
>
>
into the binary log which isn't in the original query,
like what sort of collation to use, and which character set it uses
and so on... 4.0 doesn't understand such commands and lots of things
break in this situation.
As a side note we deploy servers in pairs, with circular replic
> -Original Message-
> From: Devananda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 17:13
> To: Jeff
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> Jeff wrote:
> >>-Original Message-
> >>Fro
Jeff wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:10
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: Re: Circular Replication
Sid Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 19/09/2005 15:02:58:
stupid ?:
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, September 19, 2005 10:10
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> Sid Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 1
NOW I see the violence inhierent in the system...
this has some profoundly cool possibilities...
BWAH-HA-HA-HA!!!
muchos!
Sid Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 19/09/2005 15:02:58:
> stupid ?:
>
> what keeps them from getting caught in a write loop? turning off
> log_slave_updates?
>
> I had never thought of this but is has intriging possibilities...
Each update is marked with the unique server id of the server w
stupid ?:
what keeps them from getting caught in a write loop? turning off
log_slave_updates?
I had never thought of this but is has intriging possibilities...
Jeff wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Jeff McKeon
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 13:19
To: Devananda
Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
Subject: RE: Circular Replication
-Original Message-
From: Devananda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:55
To: Jeff
Cc
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff McKeon
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 13:19
> To: Devananda
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: RE: Circular Replication
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Devananda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> &
> -Original Message-
> From: Devananda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:55
> To: Jeff
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> Jeff wrote:
> >
> > Am I correct in this setup process:
>
position info as it
will start at the default 001 and pos 4
Circular replication is now running...
Did I mis anything?
Thanks,
Jeff
If you are using InnoDB, then you do not need to stop server A to take a
snapshot. (see http://dev.mysql.com/doc/mysql/en/mysqldump.html)
"The simultaneou
I'm using it with four machines (geographically separate) and it works fine.
Stefan
Am Friday 16 September 2005 17:31 schrieb Jeff:
> Does anyone use circular replication with MySQL 4.x? For instance:
>
> A to B
> B to A
>
> I know it's possible as long as you&
> -Original Message-
> From: Dan Nelson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:34
> To: Jeff
> Cc: mysql@lists.mysql.com
> Subject: Re: Circular Replication
>
>
> In the last episode (Sep 16), Jeff said:
> > Does anyone use ci
In the last episode (Sep 16), Jeff said:
> Does anyone use circular replication with MySQL 4.x? For instance:
>
> A to B
> B to A
>
> I know it's possible as long as you're carefull with your client
> applications and the way they write/update the db. Jus
Does anyone use circular replication with MySQL 4.x? For instance:
A to B
B to A
I know it's possible as long as you're carefull with your client
applications and the way they write/update the db. Just wondering if
anyone has had success or problems with this type of situatio
I've had some brief discussion about this with other people on other lists
and have decided to move the conversation here, since there are far wiser
MySQL gurus here than I. Here's the scenario:
I want to have two (or more, but for now let's say two) db servers
running. These servers will have
Hi!
- Original Message -
From: ""Madscientist"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: mailing.database.mysql
Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 10:44 PM
Subject: Circular replication
> Hi,
>
> We're doing something weird (what else is new). We're hopin
y need to use innodb tables.
It is not entirely clear wether replication will work with innodb
tables.
We're hoping to use MySQL 4.x
Can we build reliable, circular replication with innodb tables in MySQL?
We will have the application pick a single master node for any
particular table and/or
Just tell your boss that if you ever have turnover the former employee
will be able to log into all the customers' accounts and do whatever he
wants.
Dave
On Thu, Dec 13, 2001 at 03:29:41AM +1100, Duncan Maitland wrote:
> My questions concern a setup where a public server is running at our
> host
even/odd is a little limiting, what happens down the road when another
site needs to be added.
A better method might be to use a unique session ID for each client site
in combination with a
generated sequence ID see the white paper
at:http://www.ambysoft.com/persistenceLayer.html
in particular
My questions concern a setup where a public server is running at our
hosting company and a local office server is behind a firewall
(connected to the net via a somewhat unreliable ADSL).
The servers are configured in a circular master-slave relationship but
only a limited number of tables in the
41 matches
Mail list logo
